CCMIN112878 - Laserfiche WebLink

~yor Mercer declared the public hearing open. Mr. George Oakes, representing Amador Valley Investors and Rousseau Ind. Corp., stated these two developers were two distinct entities; one a corporation and the other a partnership, and it was his opinion the two should not be considered as one developer. The City Attorney recommended that in light of the language of the Residential Allocation Program Ordinance the Council should consider these two entities as being one developer and, therefore, RAP allocation should not exceed a total of 80 dwelling units between the two applications. This would prevent a legal attack on the allocation for violation of the Residential Allocation Program Ordinance. 78-19 Falender Corp. - Oakhill Mr. Fred Falender stated he disagreed with the staff recommendations on his project regarding Design and Traffic Circulation. He listed the swim club and park land donation which he felt should receive 3 points under Special Features rather than 1 point. He further stated that based on the fact of the alternate route to the Central Business District, which the Council previously recommended receive 3 points, he felt this category should receive 3 points instead of 0 as recommended by staff. After discussion, it was moved by Councilmember Butler, and seconded by Mayor Mercer, that Project 78-19 Falender Corporation - Oakhill, be awarded the staff recommended points for Design and 3 points for Traffic Circulation. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmen Butler, Kephart, Wood, and Mayor Mercer NOES: Councilman Brandes ABSENT: None Councilmember Brandes stated he was opposed to awarding 3 points for Traffic Circulation. 78-20 SAVCO Constr. Co. - Foothill Estates ~Ir. DeWitt Wilson gave background information regarding this project and stated that because of the previous dedication of creek easement and dedication for Foothill Road and Bernal Avenue for future widening and improvement of these streets, and cooperation with the City to pay for 50% of these improvements, he felt extra point consideration was justified in Environmental Considerations and in-Street Dedications. Council discussion ensued regarding the allowance and consideration of points for previous improvements of a project on the present application and the en- viroranental features of the project. It was moved by Councilmember Brandes, and seconded by Mayor Mercer, that Project 78-20 SAVCO Constr. Co. - Foothill Estates, be awarded +1 point for Other Environmental Considerations instead of the -1 recommended by staff. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmen Brandes, Butler, Kephart, Wood, and Mayor Mercer NOES: None ABSENT: None 2. 11/28/78